From: "cmecfautosender®flsd.uscourts.gov" <cmecfautosender®flsd.uscourts.gov>
From: "cmecfautosender®flsd.uscourts.gov" <cmecfautosender®flsd.uscourts.gov> To: "flsd_cmecf notice®flsd.uscourts.gov" <flsd_cmecf notice®flsd.uscourts.gov> Subject: Activity in Case 9:08-cv-80119-ICAM Doe I. Epstein Order on Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2010 21:40:39 +0000 Importance: Normal This is an automatic e-mail message generated by the CM/ECF system. Please DO NOT RESPOND to this e-mail because the mail box is unattended. ***NOTE TO PUBLIC ACCESS USERS*** Judicial Conference of the United States policy permits attorneys of record and parties in a case (including pro se litigants) to receive one free electronic copy of all documents filed electronically, if receipt is required by law or directed by the filer. PACER access fees apply to all other users. To avoid later charges, download a copy of each document during this first viewing. However, if the referenced document is a transcript, the free copy and 30 page limit do not
Summary
From: "cmecfautosender®flsd.uscourts.gov" <cmecfautosender®flsd.uscourts.gov> To: "flsd_cmecf notice®flsd.uscourts.gov" <flsd_cmecf notice®flsd.uscourts.gov> Subject: Activity in Case 9:08-cv-80119-ICAM Doe I. Epstein Order on Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2010 21:40:39 +0000 Importance: Normal This is an automatic e-mail message generated by the CM/ECF system. Please DO NOT RESPOND to this e-mail because the mail box is unattended. ***NOTE TO PUBLIC ACCESS USERS*** Judicial Conference of the United States policy permits attorneys of record and parties in a case (including pro se litigants) to receive one free electronic copy of all documents filed electronically, if receipt is required by law or directed by the filer. PACER access fees apply to all other users. To avoid later charges, download a copy of each document during this first viewing. However, if the referenced document is a transcript, the free copy and 30 page limit do not
Tags
Ask AI About This Document
Extracted Text (OCR)
Technical Artifacts (33)
View in Artifacts BrowserEmail addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.
9:08-CV-801199:08-CV-80119-ICAM9:08-CV-80119-KAMagwpa.combellsouth.netflsd.uscourts.govahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.comamann@podhurst.comann.marie.c.villafana@usdoj.govbeth@pathtojustice.combobbie@bciclaw.combrad@pathtojustice.comcassellp@law.utah.eduirivera@sexabuseattomey.comjcadwell@bciclaw.comjherman@hermanlaw.comjph@searcylaw.comkezell@podhurst.comkmc@searcylaw.comlawyenvillits@aol.commestrada@podhurst.commpike@bciclaw.comrcrit@bciclaw.comreelrhw@hotmail.comrjosefsberg@podhurst.coms.slater@searcylaw.comsas@searcylaw.comssm@sexabuseattomey.comvat@searcylaw.com1-888-318-226056292157279747referencedRelated Documents (6)
J. MICHAEL BURMAN. RA'
EFTA02728762
EFTA01387839
Epstein Depositions
10. 11. 12. l3. 14. 16. 17. l8. 19. Jeffrey Epstein v. Bradley J. Edwards, et Case No.: 50 2009 CA Attachments to Statement of Undisputed Facts Deposition of Jeffrey Epstein taken March 17, 2010 Deposition of Jane Doe taken March 11, 2010 (Pages 379, 380, 527, 564?67, 568) Deposition of LM. taken September 24, 2009 (Pages 73, 74, 164, 141, 605, 416) Deposition ofE.W. taken May 6, 2010 (1 15, 1.16, 255, 205, 215?216) Deposition of Jane Doe #4 (32-34, 136) Deposition of Jeffrey Eps
Case 9:08-cv-80993-KAM
Case 9:08-cv-80993-KAM Document 28 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/02/2009 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA-JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 7 Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S ANSWER & AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO PLAINTIFF'S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, files his Answer to the Second Amended Complaint and states: 1. Without knowledge and deny. 2. As to the allegations in paragraphs 2, Defendant asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. See DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Malloy v. Hogan, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment - "[i]t would be incongruous to have different standards determine the validity of a claim of privilege bas
EFTA01355646
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.